Hi Philip, On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 3:45 PM Philip Hands <p...@hands.com> wrote: > > Christian Kastner <c...@kvr.at> writes: > > > We agree on this: Debian's is a (very!) limited form of government. > > However, I argue that censorship is within these limits. > > Debian doesn't even have enough legal existence to open a bank account, > let alone apply even the lightest form of coercion to someone. <snip>
If you value your status as a Debian Developer (which the project _can_ take away), then the Debian project _does_ have some ability to coerce you. What would you be willing to do to keep your status as a DD? > Alleging that removal of such privileges amounts to an infringement of > rights[1] simply makes no sense. <snip> > [1] using the word "censorship" suggests a belief in a right to demand > syndication for one's blog, which is not a right I'm aware of. In regards to the use of the word 'censorship', looking at the definition[1][2][3] of the word seems to support its use in regards to a-h removing feeds from planet for being objectionable (and does not imply any infringement on rights). Whether that form of censorship is good or bad or rights-infringing is a separate argument. [1] https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/censorship 1: "The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security." [2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censorship 1b: "the actions or practices of censors" [3] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censor 1a: "an official who examines materials (such as publications or films) for objectionable matter" -- Eldon Koyle
